Une relation trouble au colonialisme : histoire francophone des idées au Canada et présences autochtones : Zebedee Nungak, Contre le colonialisme dopé aux stéroïdes. Le combat des Inuit du Québec pour leurs terres ancestrales, Montréal, Boréal, 2019, 181 p.Claude Couture, Srilata Ravi et François Pageau, Autour de l’oeuvre d’Yvan Lamonde. Colonialisme et modernité au Canada depuis 1867, Québec, Presses de l’Université Laval, 2019, 234 p.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La lecture deLe colonialisme dopé aux stéroïdesde Zebedee Nungak et du collectifAutour de l’oeuvred’Yvan Lamondemontre l’écart qui existe entre deux approches du colonialisme. Si l’on met à part les études qui portent directement sur les peuples autochtones, la relation des Québécoises et Québécois avec le colonialisme peut être qualifiée de trouble : ces derniers se disent victimes du colonialisme, mais cela rend opaque le rôle que le Québec – et la francophonie canadienne – jouent dans le cadre plus large d’un colonialisme d’origine européenne. Si l’oeuvre de Lamonde est riche d’une connaissance approfondie de l’histoire des idées au Québec, elle ne sort pas de ce cadre étroit. Un élargissement des manières de penser l’histoire des idées est possible si l’on se tourne vers les penseuses et penseurs autochtones, qui ne cessent de convier à l’échange en partageant leur expérience et leur compréhension du colonialisme.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".